10th Aug 2002, 04:54
I use the Green forced air induction kit on my Gti, which use the same element as the Peugeot Sport on, but undercuts the price by £80+.
I found that the low level torque was increased massively by this kit - I believe it was due to removing all the restrictive pipework and keeping the air which goes into the engine much cooler. The standard pipework got really hot under heavy use and I could feel the car "bogging down" at low revs due to the drop in torque.
1st Jan 2003, 16:40
I have owned my 106 for five months. It is the most fun a practical car could be. I believe than many induction kits will have the same effect, so whichever you choose you'll land on your feet. The best modification I could recommend is a De-cat pipe and quality exhaust. This along with the induction kit allows me to see off the likes of Clio 172's and even Civic Type R's.All this from a 147 BHP Pug (dyno proven).
8th Feb 2004, 06:58
How can you say that the 106 can see off the 172 or Type R simply by sorting out the induction and exhaust!? I have owned a 172 for 5 months now, and have upset many an Audi TT and BMW driver without the need for any modifications!! If you want to be able to compete with iconic benchmark hatches like ours, may I suggest nitrous, or maybe just go and buy one!! dream on! LOL.
10th Feb 2004, 12:46
Having seen an accurate comparison of both the 106 GTi and the Clio Williams in action, it IS possible to do a lot with the 106 (regarding induction and exhaust) and get it to see off the Clio. The earlier comment is absolutely correct.
However, both of you are missing the big point here. The factory GTi won't see off the factory Williams. And you can make such big improvements with the GTi quite simply because the factory induction layout just isn't that wonderful.
And, of course, if you do the same modifications to both cars, the Williams will win 95 percent of the time.
Great comments regarding the induction kits: an inexpensive way to add extra zip at speed.
18th Nov 2004, 13:07
Clio 172's are not that quick. I could easily see a 106 gti keeping pace at least from a standing start.
25th Feb 2005, 14:32
Re: comment of 8th Feb 2004 - what is it with 172 drivers and the superiority thing? The 172 is a damn fine hot hatch, but there are plenty of things out there that will make it look stupid. The 180 bhp, 675kg Westfield in my garage for one (which almost certainly cost me less to buy and insure than your Clio).
Oh, and if you want to debate iconic hot hatches, I think you'll find Peugeot's CV pretty much unbeatable.
14th Jul 2005, 05:13
Lets face it the Clio 172 and 182 are not as fast as they should be. I have raced several from standing starts and there is very little in it compared to my 106 gti. They do however have more torque and slightly more BHP, which gives them just the edge when racing at higher speeds.
If you do a comparison the standard 172 pushes out 170 bhp 156/ton
The GTI pushes out 120 bhp 130/ton.
Now fit the GTI with a fully through exhaust system and enclosed induction kit that will rise to anything up to 145bhp!
Handling wise the 106 gti is in a class of its own though, it’s like a go-cart on wheels, weighing less than a ton and with superb suspension set up it really can put a smile on your face. It Goes round corners like it’s on rails and when driven properly would out see many cars especially on the B roads.
16th Aug 2005, 16:35
I'm sure the 106 GTI is a nice little Hatchback, but do find it odd the comparison between this and the Clio 172.
For starters the 106 has a 0-60 of 8.7, and the 172 is 6.9 if improving the induction system gives a 1.8 second increase then Peugeot have really made a bad GTI, or alternatively the person fitting this induction system needs to go and work for a formula 1 team. To be realistic fitting a new inductions system at best should give you a 5bhp increase in power.
28th Jan 2006, 15:56
I don't know you people. I have driven a 182 and a 106 gti. to be fair the gti will stay with the clio, but it needs to work a bit harder. I would rather drive the gti all day long. it is much more fun.
3rd Feb 2006, 16:49
Re: comment 27th Oct 2005 - "The best 0-60 I have achieved is 60 in 8.432sec and 0-100mph in 24.761sec (completely standard) ".
Did you actually try? I've got a standard 2002 106 GTi and have done 0-60mph in just over 7 seconds!
15th Feb 2006, 13:35
I've just bought a 106 GTi, but I'm a poor student can anyone suggest a cheap supplier for mods?
16th Feb 2006, 04:10
Regarding the TVR cerbra comment, why do you even compare them? This is a 106 comments page, your stating the bloody obvious when you say its faster, course it is. But we can't all afford TVR's. Are you a spoilt mummys boy? Or a sad middle aged man living alone?
18th Feb 2006, 07:56
I've got a GTi, which is standard except for an Ecosse forced induction kit. This makes a mad difference, had it dyno'd and it proved 132bhp from just an induction kit. The 0-60 dropped from 7.9sec to 7.3sec. The GTi is more fun than a 172 or Williams, not to mention the Williams are all old high mileage cars, and the 172 for the price should be a lot faster than it is. I disagree about shrugging off Type R's, this isn't going to happen, but standard RS Turbos cannot keep up with me.
23rd Mar 2006, 05:25
Regarding the earlier comments about the Clio 172 being faster than the 106 GTi... it depends who's driving.
My best mate has a bog standard 182 (not the Cup version though), and when we race from a standing start, he's usually only one or two car lengths ahead of my 106 GTi at 130mph.
The only mod to my 106 is a K&N induction kit fitted by the previous owner. It's not as though it's his driving which is at fault either, as we've swapped cars and raced in each others. The results were the same - only a couple of car lengths in it at 130mph.
When you consider that his is a 2 litre and my 106 is only a 1.6, you realise that the 106 is damn quick for what it is. Obviously there are cars out there which will beat it, but there aren't many which are as fun to drive as either the Clio 182 or the 106 GTi.
I'm glad I bought mine, best 4 grand I've ever spent.
30th Mar 2006, 08:26
I also own a W-plate 106 GTi, but have just bought a new (ie. "old" model) Civic Type-R. Just to put paid to the previous comment that spawned so many replies, it's ludicrous to suggest that the Pug could be faster.
I had some reservations that the Type-R might not handle quite as well as the Pug, but they turned out to be unfounded - the CTR has the advantage.
I have a K&N "Generation 2" (I think it's called?!?). Don't be put off by comments that I saw prior to getting it that you'll have trouble starting the car on cold days - for me, it was never an issue.
I had a Milltek system for a while, and I'd recommend it - I can't offer a comparison with the Magnex exhaust, except to say that you see the Magnex's on a lot of cars.
I didn't notice any significant gain with the filter (this went on before the exhaust) but there was a noticeable improvement when the exhaust went on.
I'd recommend spark plugs. It's such a small thing that most people ignore, but for what it costs for a set of "peformance" plugs, it's definitely worthwhile. I'd swear blind that there was a gain, and more than you'd expect for a few coins.
I'd also recommend Shell Optimax and Goodyear Eagle F1 tyres.
To anyone thinking of buying a GTi: Get one now, before they get any older. It's a fantastic car, value for money, and great fun. Mine rattles, squeeks, and leaks, but it's still great. Think of it more like a roller skate than a car. Fantastic handling, nippy, and understated. I've had a few problems with the electrics, and the suspension. The latter seems to be a common problem that you need to look out for.
There are many reviews against it - it's "old fashioned", "basic", "unsafe", etc. These people are missing the point - it's a toy. I've given it solid abuse that no car should stand up to, for five years now. It's done 80k miles, and I'm still not bored with it.